Former IBP president Atty. Domingo Cayosa said remarks by Martin Romualdez on “command responsibility” over the 2025 budget should not be seen as a direct accusation against President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.

Cayosa, in a radio interview, clarified that Romualdez’s statement was more of a legal theory than an outright allegation of wrongdoing.

“It’s not yet an accusation. It’s just a statement of a theory, an assumption. When mentioning the command responsibility, he did not particularly implicate Marcos,” he said in mixed English and Filipinos.

Despite this, Cayosa stressed that the President cannot completely distance himself from the controversy surrounding the national budget, noting that Marcos himself signed the 2025 General Appropriations Act.

“He [the president] cannot totally say he had nothing to do with it because he signed the document,” he said.

Cayosa added that as head of the Executive branch, the President is presumed to have reviewed the budget before approving it, with the help of Cabinet officials and legal advisers.

He then urged Romualdez to substantiate it further under oath if needed.

He also noted that while sitting presidents are immune from criminal prosecution, they may still be held accountable through impeachment.

“While the President is in office, he cannot be charged with a criminal case. But he can be held accountable through an impeachment case,” he said.

In his previous statement, Romualdez denied any involvement in alleged irregularities tied to the 2025 budget, rejecting claims linking him to plunder or conspiracy cases.

“[There] is no evidence that proves that I committed plunder, conspiracy to commit plunder, or any similar offense that the Ombudsman may be contemplating against me,” Romualdez said.

He also argued that if the concept of command responsibility is applied, accountability should primarily fall on the Executive branch, not the Legislature.

“If corruption were to occur on the scale alleged… it happens at the level of execution of the General Appropriations Act,” Romualdez said.

“That is why command responsibility is more logically attributed to the Executive branch,” he added, citing its role in supervision and implementation.